New York Times: There should be a team for deconstruction of New York Times' text. Each should be given the task within his/her own specialty. I cannot believe how much obfuscation, distortion, and errors one finds in NYT text. Today, NEIL MacFARQUHAR has an article on Lebanon. First, he says this: "Mr. Hariri was a Sunni Muslim who believed in Arab causes, but he also spoke to the many Lebanese, particularly Christians, who consider themselves misplaced Europeans." Hariri never spoke for Christians until his death. He was a sectarian Sunni Muslim leader who capitalized on (and exploited) sectarian tensions in the country. Only after his assassination, some right-wing Christian leader exploited his assassination, and suddenly (after dismissing him for years as "Syrian puppet" and as somebody who is intent on the "Islamization of Lebanon") discovered his genius. Secondly, yes, there are some kooky Lebanese who think that they are "misplaced Europeans." But many Christians are not like that: they are people who know exactly who they are. And this is how NYT correspondent explains Hariri: "He wore good suits, smoked expensive cigars, spoke three languages fluently and lunched with friends like France's president, Jacques Chirac." That matters. Not his wealth, and his buying of people. As for the foreign debt (more than $40 billion, not $35 billion) that Hariri accumulated, this is how it is explained: "He was rebuilding downtown Beirut to become the financial and tourism Mecca it had been before the civil war. He ran up some $35 billion in debt - but Lebanese habitually live beyond their means." More than 20 % of Lebanese live below the poverty line (and poverty expanded under Hariri), and they cannot even afford to live beyond their means. Does this not tell you how narrow the class basis of the people that this correspondent has talked to? Is this how governments' behavior will now be explained?